Advertisement

Advertisement

Why UK’s net porn filter will be tricky to enforce

By Jacob Aron

Automatic network-level blocking of adult sites is not hard to get around, critics say

(Image: Atlas Press/Eyevine)

Any household in the UK wanting to access internet pornography will have to opt in to do so under new proposals laid out by prime minister David Cameron today. The move is designed to help parents prevent their children from viewing adult material online, but critics say filtering will be difficult to implement and could block legitimate websites.

Cameron has asked internet service providers (ISPs) to implement network-level filters restricting access to certain websites. Customers who want to disable the filters will have to take specific action when opening a new account. “If you just click ‘next’ or ‘enter’, then the filters are automatically on,” said Cameron.

Only adult account holders will be able to switch the filters off, he added. “It should not be the case that technically literate children can just flick the filters off at the click of a mouse without anyone knowing.”

Advertisement

Blocked by default

How this will work in practice is unclear and will be left to the ISPs themselves to figure out. Access to the internet over mobile phone networks in the UK is already filtered by default, requiring customers to prove they are over 18 in order to unlock them. Many ISPs also already offer filtering services on home internet connections, but the new proposals would require all ISPs to implement them and have them turned on by default.

One UK ISP, TalkTalk, has implemented parental controls since 2011 with its HomeSafe service, which lets parents filter a range of material including pornography, drug and suicide-related sites. A spokesperson for the company said a third of households had chosen to activate the filters when offered the choice on sign-up. More broadly, a government consultation last year found that 14 per cent of parents supported default network filtering, with 9 per cent favouring parental controls and 7 per cent a combination of the two.

Earlier this year the government in Iceland attempted to implement similar proposals, but the bill failed to pass in parliament. Other countries, including, perhaps unsurprisingly, China, Iran and Tunisia, already have extensive filtering in place.

Mistakes likely

Default rather than optional filters could cause problems, says Jim Killock, executive director of the Open Rights Group in London, an organisation that campaigns against restrictions on the internet. “You don’t want people to find lots of websites are blocked for reason they don’t understand.” The algorithms and blacklists that ISPs rely on to assess web content will make mistakes, he says, either blocking legitimate content or lulling parents into a false sense security while allowing adult material to slip through.

It is also not clear how ISPs will prevent children from circumventing the filters, by using proxy websites or peer-to-peer networks, for example.

“Network-level filtering is the least robust filtering. It is the easiest to get round,” says Killock. Device-level filters, which block a particular computer or phone from accessing sites, are more effective, he says, and ultimately parental responsibility and education are key to protecting children online. “Britain leads the world in installing filters but is probably one of the worst in Europe at having school lessons where people talk about internet sex issues.”

Cameron also favours educating children about the dangers of the internet, pointing to a newly launched school curriculum designed to do so. “We need to teach our children not just about how to stay safe online but how to behave online too – on social media and over phones with their friends.”